In 1978 Clostridium difficile was first recognized as a major cause of diarrhea and pseudomembranous colitis associated with the use of antimicrobial agents. Since this time, infection by C. difficile has been steadily growing in incidence, morbidity, and mortality across North America and Europe (Freeman at al. Clin Microbiol Rev 2010; 23:529-49, Kelly and LaMont. N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1932-40). Analysis of the U.S. National Hospital Discharge Survey statistics between 1996 and 2003 reveals a doubling in the prevalence of diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI), to 0.61/1,000, among inpatients (McDonald at al. Emerg Infect Dis 2006; 12:409-15). A 2008 survey of 12.5% of all U.S. acute care facilities indicated a CDI prevalence rate of 13.1/1,000, which is at least an order of magnitude higher than that found previously (Jarvis t al. Am J Infect Control 2009; 37:263-70). While older patients have disproportionately greater rates of CDI than younger individuals, no age group is spared, and the incidence of CDI-related hospitalizations has been rising even in the pediatric population (Zilberberg et al. Emerg Infect Dis 2010; 16:604-9). The increase in incidence has been further compounded by an elevated frequency of the most severe forms of this disease, as evidenced by rising CDI-associated morbidity and case fatality (Ricciardi et al. Arch Surg 2007; 142:624-31; discussion 631, Zilberberg et al. Emerg Infect Dis 2008; 14:929-31). This is, in part, related to the emergence of more virulent C. difficile strains, such as PCR ribotype 027/North American Pulsed Field type 1 (NAP1), which is characterized by a greater potential for toxin production and antibiotic resistance than other clinically-relevant rains (Rupnik et al. Nat Rev Microbiol 2009; 7:526-36, Kuijper et al. Euro Surveill 2008; 13).
Recurrent CDI is one of the most difficult and increasingly common challenges associated with CDI (Surawicz, Gastroenterology 2009; 136:1152-4). An initial incidence of CDI can be followed by a relapse within 30 days in about 20-30% of cases (Kelly and LaMont. N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1932-40, Louie et al. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:422-31, Pepin et al. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42:758-64), and the risk of recurrence doubles after two or more occurrences (McDonald et al. Emerg Infect Dis 2006; 12:409-15). Older age, intercurrent antibiotic use for non-C. difficile indications, renal insufficiency, immune deficiency, and antacid medications, are some of the known risk factors for recurrent CDI (Surawicz, Gastroenterology 2009; 136:1152-4, Garey et al. J Hosp Infect 2008; 70:298-304). The presence of just three clinical criteria: age >65 years, severe disease, and continued use of antibiotics after treating the initial CDI episode, are predictive of an almost 90% relapse rate (Hu et al. Gastroenterology 2009; 136:1206-14). CDI also commonly complicates management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), which has recently been recognized as an additional independent risk factor for CDI infection (Issa et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5:345-51, Rodemann et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5:339-4415). CDI in patients with underlying IBD is associated with increased severity of colitis and higher rates of recurrence and colectomy (Issa et al. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008; 14:1432-42).
It is now recognized that the presence of normal, healthy, intestinal microbiota (normal gut microorganisms) offers protection against CDI. Conversely, severe disruption of normal intestinal microbiota by use of antibiotics, including metronidazole and vancomycin that are used to treat CDI, is likely one of the major reason for its recurrence. Chang and colleagues used 16S rDNA sequencing to analyze the fecal microbiota of seven patients with initial and recurrent CDI (Chang et al. J Infect Dis 2008; 197:435-8). They reported that bacterial species diversity was reduced in all patients compared to normal control subjects. The greatest reduction in species diversity, however, was found in the three patients with recurrent CDI and disruption of their gut microbiota was evident at the phylum level—with marked reduction in Bacteriodetes, normally one of the two dominant phyla in the colon. Instead, the gut microbiota in these patients were dominated by members of the proteobacteria and verrucomicrobia phyla, which normally are only minor constituents of the colon microbiota.
The general aim of antibiotic treatment for recurrent CDI is not mere suppression of C. difficile, but also preservation of the residual colon microbiota and optimization of their restoration. Various antibiotic regimens, including long tapered or pulsed dosing with vancomycin (McFarland et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97:1769-75) and rifaximin “chaser” protocols (Johnson et al. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44:846-8, Johnson et al. Anaerobe 2009; 15:290-1) have been used to achieve this objective with partial success. Recently, fidaxomicin, a new macrocyclic antibiotic which is narrow in spectrum and spares Bacteroides species, was shown to reduce the initial relapse rate of CDI by 50% compared to vancomycin treatment (Louie et al. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:422-31). However, treatment with fidaxomicin did not alter the recurrence rate of CDI caused by the more virulent PCR 027/NAP1 strain. Therefore, despite these advances it seems likely that the challenges in treatment of recurrent CDI will remain for the foreseeable future.
Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), also commonly known as ‘fecal bacteriotherapy’ represents the one therapeutic protocol that allows the fastest reconstitution of a normal composition of colon microbial communities. For many decades, FMT has been offered by select centers across the world, typically as an option of last resort for patients with recurrent CDI. The mostly commonly earliest cited report for FMT was by Eiseman and colleagues who in 1958 described the use of fecal enemas for patients who likely had severe or fulminant form of pseudomembranous colitis (Eiseman et al. Surgery 1958; 44:854-9). Since this time, well over 200 cases have been reported as individual case reports, or small case series, with a ˜90% cumulative success rate in clearing recurrent CDI, without any noted adverse events. The history and general methodology used for FMT have been described in several recent reviews (Bakken. Anaerobe 2009; 15:285-9, van Nood et al. Euro Surveill 2009; 14, Khoruts and Sadowsky. Mucosal Immunol 2011; 4:4-7). However, despite the long and successful track record, as well as great clinical need, the availability of the procedure for many patients remains very limited.
The lack of wider practice of FMT is due in large part to multiple non-trivial practical barriers and not due to lack of efficacy. These include lack of reimbursement for donor screening, lack of adequate donors at the correct time, difficulty in material preparation and administration, as well as aesthetic concerns about doing the procedure in endoscopy or medical office. These also include patient perception of the procedure, willingness of staff to perform the procedure, sanitation issues related to manipulation of fecal matter. Together these factors make it a distasteful option that is often considered a treatment of last resort, and that is largely unavailable to the vast majority of patients who could benefit from it. Moreover, the pharmaceutical industry has shown little interest in technological development of FMT-based therapeutics, in large part due to the wide availability of donor material and its complex composition. Instead, development has been driven mostly by individual clinicians faced with desperate need in their patients.